vail

I use the Bose noise reduction--about 20% of the time they tell me to turn that off--so I do not think it has anything to do with hearing in an evacuation.
I hear everything more clearly with them on.

s80dude

I remember once I forgot to turn off my cell phone and there I am doing my demo (I think I was demonstrating how to use the oxygen) when my phone started ringing in back pocket. I was mortified, but it was a business crowd, so we all had a good laugh. Had it been Vegas or a more "Leisure" crowd, God help me!

oklAAhoma

Priceless.

fishee

What exactly do you mean by "Oakland" residents? What is the distinction between "Oakland" and Los Angeles residents? And what is the relevance of your wife's weight -- that doesn't seem unreasonably large.

daggett24

If cell phones actually do interfere, then at some airports where the final approach goes right over the highway, cell phone use by motorists on the highway should be limited as well.

aamilesslave

Yea, I'm still calling BS. dallasnews.com's archive of stories published since 1986 yields no results for the following search:
southwest dallas san antonio phone

ihdihd

Not entirely sure about whether this is REALLY the reason. Here's what I remember from back in college in my EM waves class. When positioning a cell tower, the signal theoretically propagates in a sphere. In this (THEORETICAL) case, the signal would reach any point a distance x from the tower, even in the vertical direction. The problem though is that a single tower's signal is not enough to reach 30,000 feet (5 miles). In the horizontal(ish) plane, this problem is counteracted because multiple towers essentially slingshot their signal off of each other (contructive interference). This way, instead of the wave strength being a perfect sphere, it looks more like an infinity sign (sideways 8) where the axis of the 8 is the line crossing through both towers.

Since you don't have two towers on top of one another, this slighshot cons. intereference can't occur to provide you a signal at 30K feet. So is it possible, yes, but is it the true reason why they don't want you using cell phones, nope... that dude needs to go back to his engineers. In my opinion, he was just feeding some hill cronies some BS to keep them happy.

Any EM waves people that know this better that can explain it?

ihdihd

To humor you guys, here's an article the economist wrote back in September about in flight announcements and the truth behind them. If you know the Economist, this is as funny as they get (and its pretty funny)....

Welcome aboard

Sep 7th 2006
From The Economist print edition

In-flight announcements are not entirely truthful. What might an honest one sound like?

“GOOD morning, ladies and gentlemen. We are delighted to welcome you aboard Veritas Airways, the airline that tells it like it is. Please ensure that your seat belt is fastened, your seat back is upright and your tray-table is stowed. At Veritas Airways, your safety is our first priority. Actually, that is not quite true: if it were, our seats would be rear-facing, like those in military aircraft, since they are safer in the event of an emergency landing. But then hardly anybody would buy our tickets and we would go bust.

The flight attendants are now pointing out the emergency exits. This is the part of the announcement that you might want to pay attention to. So stop your sudoku for a minute and listen: knowing in advance where the exits are makes a dramatic difference to your chances of survival if we have to evacuate the aircraft. Also, please keep your seat belt fastened when seated, even if the seat-belt light is not illuminated. This is to protect you from the risk of clear-air turbulence, a rare but extremely nasty form of disturbance that can cause severe injury. Imagine the heavy food trolleys jumping into the air and bashing into the overhead lockers, and you will have some idea of how nasty it can be. We don't want to scare you. Still, keep that seat belt fastened all the same.


Your life-jacket can be found under your seat, but please do not remove it now. In fact, do not bother to look for it at all. In the event of a landing on water, an unprecedented miracle will have occurred, because in the history of aviation the number of wide-bodied aircraft that have made successful landings on water is zero. This aircraft is equipped with inflatable slides that detach to form life rafts, not that it makes any difference. Please remove high-heeled shoes before using the slides. We might as well add that space helmets and anti-gravity belts should also be removed, since even to mention the use of the slides as rafts is to enter the realm of science fiction.

Please switch off all mobile phones, since they can interfere with the aircraft's navigation systems. At least, that's what you've always been told. The real reason to switch them off is because they interfere with mobile networks on the ground, but somehow that doesn't sound quite so good. On most flights a few mobile phones are left on by mistake, so if they were really dangerous we would not allow them on board at all, if you think about it. We will have to come clean about this next year, when we introduce in-flight calling across the Veritas fleet. At that point the prospect of taking a cut of the sky-high calling charges will miraculously cause our safety concerns about mobile phones to evaporate.

On channel 11 of our in-flight entertainment system you will find a video consisting of abstract imagery and a new-age soundtrack, with a voice-over explaining some exercises you can do to reduce the risk of deep-vein thrombosis. We are aware that this video is tedious, but it is not meant to be fun. It is meant to limit our liability in the event of lawsuits.

Once we have reached cruising altitude you will be offered a light meal and a choice of beverages—a word that sounds so much better than just saying ‘drinks’, don't you think? The purpose of these refreshments is partly to keep you in your seats where you cannot do yourselves or anyone else any harm. Please consume alcohol in moderate quantities so that you become mildly sedated but not rowdy. That said, we can always turn the cabin air-quality down a notch or two to help ensure that you are sufficiently drowsy.

After take-off, the most dangerous part of the flight, the captain will say a few words that will either be so quiet that you will not be able to hear them, or so loud that they could wake the dead. So please sit back, relax and enjoy the flight. We appreciate that you have a choice of airlines and we thank you for choosing Veritas, a member of an incomprehensible alliance of obscure foreign outfits, most of which you have never heard of. Cabin crew, please make sure we have remembered to close the doors. Sorry, I mean: ‘Doors to automatic and cross-check’. Thank you for flying Veritas.”

chicaloca453

Well said! Like it or not, it's a rule. Who are we to have so little disregard for the rules that we don't follow the ones we don't like? I think chewing gum in class is harmless, but it's against the rules so I don't (well didn't since I'm long past grade school). I think it's stupid to have to stop at a red light without any traffic around for miles, but I do. I think it's stupid to have to use a crosswalk to cross a street when the street is desserted. But I do. Rules are a way of life, and we need to respect them.

Flight attendants already have a tough job. Why should we make it any tougher by making them be the nagging mommies as well? Just do what you're told and turn off your devices. Even if there's the SLIGHTEST chance that something (laptop, ipod, phone, etc.) COULD interfere with the operation of the aircraft, why would you want to chance it? Your luck may run out someday.

As far as the OP's question, I would ring the call button and bring it to the FA's attention. Then, if she chose to ignore it, I'd write her up because she's not doing her job.

Some of us do follow the rules. Others ARE FAA "spies" planted to break the rules to see if they get caught. A FA is supposed to enforce the rules for EVERYONE. And if he/she does not and one of those spies sees it, she could lose her job (or he/his).

Some people have kids on board. When they see adults breaking the rules, they're more likely to think it's okay for them to as well. And it's not just about "dumb" FAA rules. It's about ANY rule. Why not try setting a good example and doing what you're asked. I mean really, is it going to hurt you to turn off that ipod 1 song early? Are we really THAT technology dependant? If we are, it's a sad thing.

chicaloca453

Okay, so you enjoy breaking more than one rule with this one. The seat back pockets are NOT for anything but reading material. The reason for this is that if they become stretched out then they can't hold a safety informaiton card. In order for a seat to be operational (i.e. sellable), the seat back pocket MUST be able to hold a safety information card. So if your laptop stretches out the pocket, the airline can't sell the seat.

And I HAVE seen FA's enforce this one. I've even heard them ask to remove ipods and cd players from the pocket so as not to stretch them. And on recent UA flights, this was part of the preflight anouncements.

nixande

A recent episode of Mythbuster tested this myth.

(In case you dont know mythbuster: They take all kind of myths and try to proove or bust it. Favorite things to test by them? Everything with a lot of potential for desaster).

The in lab results where that most signals do not interfere with anything recocnizable - EXCEPT the signal by the 800er system used in the US. 900/1800/1900 where fine.

They tested it on a small plane standing on the ground and running and could not measure any effect at all with different mobile phones.

They where dying to test it in air - but as official law seems to be against this, they were not even allowed to do it on mythbuster.

(this may sound cheesy but they actually do their research and have a good way of really really testing it. I highly recommend the program)

conclusion was: while it seems to not be effective in theory and in practise on the ground, one should still think about not doing it.

timfountain

So are you sure all the nav/comms equipment is located at the sharp end?
Some of you are missing the point. It is not only about possible interference, but also about having the full attention of the pax in case of emergencies, as well as just complying with reasonable crewmember instructions as per the FAR's.

- Tim

timfountain

No law prohibits any electronic device if VFR. Also they tested one plane. How can they be sure that any other plane with different equipment will respond the same way, HINT - they can't.... They busted the myth in one specific set of circumstances.

- Tim

nixande

Let me put it this way:
Most people flying a lot complain about stress. The mobile rule is a very good reason to be "doomed" not to be able to work.

The fact that this IS a delicat system and - in case you do mind looking at the monitor from time to time - at the speed at which you never will travel otherwise I really do not want anything interfering with another.

To give you a story of something less heavy:
Friends of mine had wireless headphones for their tv, an older wireless telephone and an outside termometer which would communicate with the base station wirelessly (quite clever - taking the temperature outside and have the box inside).

When the head phones where on and they received a call, the wireless weather station would freeze. Reliable, every time.

mobile phone interferes with mp3 players, normal phones and even your monitors.

Yes, most of the systems are pretty secure. But I am more than happy to turn off my mobile phone for the off chance of throwing the system off.

Because in that case I do not want to fly!

[And I would be curious about the differences of wireless in the plane and wireless mouse ...]

nixande

I found the testing in lab to be quite interesting alone. I would assume that they also would have liked to test it on another plane but this made for better TV.

In general I expect a bigger plane to be even 'more' secure.

But then there is always the possibility of a review ... in fact I think they should test wlan on a plane.

(snakes. who needs snakes.)